Please note: we have been online over ten years, and we want The Trek BBS to continue as a free site. But if you block our ads we are at risk.Please consider unblocking ads for this site - every ad you view counts and helps us pay for the bandwidth that you are using. Thank you for your understanding.

Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.

When I first saw those pics on the MI6 website I didn't even recognise Bardem first off!

It may just be the nature of the filming, but anyone else getting the vibe that this film will be set far more in the UK than any other Bond film?

Well production has moved to Turkey, and Daniel Craig will be there in April to film. But yes, London is going to be a major location in this film, since it appears (from what we know) that most of the plot revolves around what happens there.

__________________
"The saying implies but does not name the effective agency of its supposed utopia.... 'Needs and abilities' are, of course, subjective. So the operative statement may be reduced to 'the State shall take, the State shall give'."

__________________
"The saying implies but does not name the effective agency of its supposed utopia.... 'Needs and abilities' are, of course, subjective. So the operative statement may be reduced to 'the State shall take, the State shall give'."

I dunno. I like Tom Hardy a lot, he was great in Inception and Tinker Tailor, and I anticipate him being good as Bane.

But...

He is a bit rough and ready, and whilst you could say the same about Craig to an extent, I think he's somewhat more polished. Also, and there's no polite way to put this, but Hardy always comes across as somewhat sleazy. It's an engaging kind of sleaziness but there nontheless and I think he'd be better suited to a Harry Palmer type spy than 007.

As for Nolan...

I think he's a wonderful Director, but as time passes his films are becoming more and more bloated (which seems to happen to every director over time) so I don't know. He did say the snowbound bits in Inception was his homage to Bond, and frankly I found that part of the film strangeley dull.

Much as I'd love the next Bond to be Fassbender, his star is rising way too fast for that, and so I'll go with the next 007 being some bloke we've never heard of.

^ Different strokes/ different folks. I thought that the snowbound scene in Inception was a fantastic OMHSS homage. And IIRC he said that he wanted Batman Begins to be a bit like a Bond movie, with its globe-trotting, epic scope. Appropriate that he should use Ras Al Ghul as the villain, given that Denny O'Neill created him as a response to the villains of the Bond movies of the 1960s and 1970s.

I don't really agree with you about Hardy's sleaziness. Sure, he had a bit of that in Inception but I think he's a total chameleon; compare his character in Inception with that in Bronson. And he's recently essayed a spy twice - in This Means War and Tinker, Tailor... Having said that, I don't think he will be the next 007; I agree, it's likely to be someone we've never heard of or, if we have heard of him, won't have envisaged him as Bond.

The trouble, for me, with that section of the film was that every fucker was wearing white so at times I didn't have a clue who was who!

I probably just haven't seen him in enough stuff, but even when I've thought he was great (which a good proportion of time I have, hell I've even forgiven him for Nemesis) he's never leapt off the screen as a potential Bond the way Fassbender has.